|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 517
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 517 |
I just wanted to add... Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun...
Yet he doesnt think i should have a gun and he gets to keep driving..
and the Global Warming thing... its a cycle.. i find fossils all over the place here from sea creatures when this place was under water.
The oceans used to cover the land all the way up to the hill country.
Last edited by RMX; 07/24/08 04:41 PM.
FBH 34 me,FWW 34, DS 14, OC-D 12 (given up for adoption), DS-8, DD-5 D-Day#1 10-12-1998 D-Day#2 2-10-2008 Recovered!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816 |
There are fossils on Mt Everest, but their presence has nothing 2 do with cycles.
Similarly (though not as obvious), the coming and going of the Cretaceous seaway in North America (and similar events in earlier times and in other places in the world) is related 2 variations in the continental freeboard due to isostacy, which may have affected climate, but was not a result of it.
And once again, humans are doing stuff that has never been done before, that has an additional influence on climate that we don't yet understand. If we can cut back on things like pollution - things that are obviously hazardous 2 ourselves - without trashing our economies in the process, why not do so even if we don't yet understand the effects?
-ol' 2long
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 517
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 517 |
My point about the fossils, is that all this has happened before, and all this will happen again.
Our planet is four and half billion years old. There has been life on this planet for nearly that long. Three point eight billion years. The first bacteria. And, later, the first multicellular animals, then the first complex creatures, in the sea, on the land.
Then the great sweeping ages of animals -- the amphibians, the dinosaurs, the mammals, each lasting millions upon millions of years. Great dynasties of creatures arising, flourishing, dying away.
All this happening against a background of continuous and violent upheaval, mountain ranges thrust up and eroded away, cometary impacts, volcanic eruptions spewing tons and tons of highly toxic dust into the atmosphere, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving.
Endless constant and violent change.... The planet has survived everything, in its time.
It will certainly survive us.... Quote stolen by me and one sentenced changed to avoid plagarism heh
P.S. There is global warming on Mars too, someone should say something to them.
Last edited by RMX; 07/24/08 07:50 PM.
FBH 34 me,FWW 34, DS 14, OC-D 12 (given up for adoption), DS-8, DD-5 D-Day#1 10-12-1998 D-Day#2 2-10-2008 Recovered!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 556
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 556 |
Good Grief - what ever started this whole thread. Was it politics or someone trying to work on a relationship that was in trouble!?!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880 |
Man-made global warming is well beyond debate. The worldwide scientific community almost unanimously agrees that is it real, we caused it, and very bad things will happen if we don't fix it...assuming it's not too late already.
A few exceptions aside, only crackpots and members of conservative think-tanks dispute global warming.
Given the evidence, why would one dispute the existence of man-made global warming? Are you worried that Exxon-Mobil excutives will make fewer millions each year if we move away from fossil fuels? What's the deal?
Divorced
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816 |
Man-made global warming is well beyond debate. The worldwide scientific community almost unanimously agrees that is it real, we caused it, and very bad things will happen if we don't fix it...assuming it's not too late already.
A few exceptions aside, only crackpots and members of conservative think-tanks dispute global warming.
Given the evidence, why would one dispute the existence of man-made global warming? Are you worried that Exxon-Mobil excutives will make fewer millions each year if we move away from fossil fuels? What's the deal? You're right, it's beyond debate. The effects of runaway global warming are evident: Venus' surface temperatures average over 900F, day or night, and yet Venus is not that much closer to the sun than Earth and should have formed with a lot more water than it currently has (less than 1 precipitable meter globally). Also, the crater preservation record indicates that the entire planet was resurfaced catastrophically about a billion years ago. Whether this happens cyclically via swallowing itself through its belly button or just once due to a collision with another planet or its own large moon isn't important. What is important is that the catastrophic release of CO2 in2 the atmosphere made the surface so hot that water vapor won't condense. Even carbonate rocks melt at Venus tempera2res (and then become part of the greenhouse atmosphere). One idea about Mars, based on observations over just a few Mars years, is that the planet is warming. But if it is, it's likely just a part of the normal Milankovic cycles, which are much more extreme for Mars than for Earth. And even if there is life there, it's not burning fossil fuels. -ol' 2long
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880 |
Man-made global warming is well beyond debate. The worldwide scientific community almost unanimously agrees that is it real, we caused it, and very bad things will happen if we don't fix it...assuming it's not too late already.
A few exceptions aside, only crackpots and members of conservative think-tanks dispute global warming.
Given the evidence, why would one dispute the existence of man-made global warming? Are you worried that Exxon-Mobil excutives will make fewer millions each year if we move away from fossil fuels? What's the deal? You're right, it's beyond debate. The effects of runaway global warming are evident: Venus' surface temperatures average over 900F, day or night, and yet Venus is not that much closer to the sun than Earth and should have formed with a lot more water than it currently has (less than 1 precipitable meter globally). Also, the crater preservation record indicates that the entire planet was resurfaced catastrophically about a billion years ago. Whether this happens cyclically via swallowing itself through its belly button or just once due to a collision with another planet or its own large moon isn't important. What is important is that the catastrophic release of CO2 in2 the atmosphere made the surface so hot that water vapor won't condense. Even carbonate rocks melt at Venus tempera2res (and then become part of the greenhouse atmosphere). One idea about Mars, based on observations over just a few Mars years, is that the planet is warming. But if it is, it's likely just a part of the normal Milankovic cycles, which are much more extreme for Mars than for Earth. And even if there is life there, it's not burning fossil fuels. -ol' 2long Venus? Mars? You might as well base opinions on Anarctica on what you know about the Amazon rainforest.
Divorced
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
Man-made global warming is well beyond debate. The worldwide scientific community almost unanimously agrees that is it real, we caused it, and very bad things will happen if we don't fix it...assuming it's not too late already.
A few exceptions aside, only crackpots and members of conservative think-tanks dispute global warming.
Given the evidence, why would one dispute the existence of man-made global warming? Are you worried that Exxon-Mobil excutives will make fewer millions each year if we move away from fossil fuels? What's the deal? You're right, it's beyond debate. The effects of runaway global warming are evident: Venus' surface temperatures average over 900F, day or night, and yet Venus is not that much closer to the sun than Earth and should have formed with a lot more water than it currently has (less than 1 precipitable meter globally). Also, the crater preservation record indicates that the entire planet was resurfaced catastrophically about a billion years ago. Whether this happens cyclically via swallowing itself through its belly button or just once due to a collision with another planet or its own large moon isn't important. What is important is that the catastrophic release of CO2 in2 the atmosphere made the surface so hot that water vapor won't condense. Even carbonate rocks melt at Venus tempera2res (and then become part of the greenhouse atmosphere). One idea about Mars, based on observations over just a few Mars years, is that the planet is warming. But if it is, it's likely just a part of the normal Milankovic cycles, which are much more extreme for Mars than for Earth. And even if there is life there, it's not burning fossil fuels. -ol' 2long you sound like John Scalzi. I actually agree that humans are contributing to global warming and that we should take steps to slow this. I don't know how much of an impact it will have...but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816 |
Venus? Mars? You might as well base opinions on Anarctica on what you know about the Amazon rainforest. Hey, I used 2 work on Venus, and I've been working on Mars now for 26 years! Good thing my truck gets good mileage! -ol' 2long
Last edited by 2long; 07/25/08 12:58 PM. Reason: 50 miles west of Venus
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862 |
Man-made global warming is well beyond debate. The worldwide scientific community almost unanimously agrees that is it real, we caused it, and very bad things will happen if we don't fix it...assuming it's not too late already. Well, then I guess someone ought to tell a a major unit w/in the American Physical Society the debate is over b/c many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate---> LINK
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816 |
I think not: http://www.aps.org/box at top right under the header. -ol' 2long ETA: Marshmallow, the link you posted is empty. Perhaps the article has been retracted.
Last edited by 2long; 07/25/08 03:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880 |
http://www.aps.org/about/pressreleases/climatechange08.cfmLooks like the APS has retained their sanity to me. A few GOP-funded rogues decide to go against reason, and you listen to them? What about the other 95%? Or, is that your stance on global warming because you're a conservative, and "that's just how conservatives believe"?
Last edited by Krazy71; 07/25/08 04:02 PM.
Divorced
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862 |
Marshmallow, the link you posted is empty. Perhaps the article has been retracted. The link worked for me.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862 |
I never said the APS changed its position on global warming... at least not yet. This effort comes from a subgroup w/in the APS. The APS “reaffirmed” their 2007 position, but momentum is shifting away from them, and the debate will occur regardless.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,880 |
What is the point of being anti-global warming?
Just to go against the liberals, or is there some greater reason?
Just what would it take to change your mind?
The debate will go on forever, as long as there's one dissenter with a science degree and a microphone.
I don't know, but I'd bet that the most stubborn opposition to global warming is here in the USA.
Then again, the Board of Education in my state isn't even sure about evolution, so it's no surprise.
Divorced
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816 |
42nately, "the right 2 bear global warmth" isn't in the Consti2tion... -ol' 2long
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862 |
I confess, I am a global warming atheist. Until I acquire the faith that you have in global warming, I will remain one. You see when I read pieces like this written by the rocket scientist, who built Australia’s compliance protocol for the Kyoto Accords, I have to conclude that the scientific community jumped to conclusions. When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” LINKWhat is the point of being anti-global warming? Just to go against the liberals, or is there some greater reason? Look at this poll---> LINK Do you think that most Brits don't believe in GW b/c they just want to against the liberals? Or do you think there might be some greater reason? Do you think they might be sick of oppressive restrictions on their freedoms and on high taxes that are forced upon them by their government b/c of GW? No country can tax and restrict itself into prosperity, and the Brits are learning that first hand today. And I'll bet articles like this must make them scratch their heads too---> Clean air causes global warming I don't know, but I'd bet that the most stubborn opposition to global warming is here in the USA. Countries like India and China, two of the worst polluters, don't seem to be embracing global warming, do they?
|
|
|
Moderated by Ariel, BerlinMB, Denali, Fordude, IrishGreen, MBeliever, MBSync, McLovin, Mizar, PhoenixMB, Toujours
0 members (),
623
guests, and
50
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|